[The Kurly One]

I have a decent kit I think. But I want to expand but am not sure which direction to head in. Here is my kit

Kr
Kx
DA* 50-135
Tamron 16-50 f2.8
DA 12-24
FA 50 f1.4
Vivitar 100mm Macro
Tak 135 f.25
M 200 f4

Thats my carry around or always near me.

I love doing landscape and bigger than life stuff the 12-24 is my main lens. I would like to go wider and am debating on the Sigma 8-16, but if I get that will I be happy with its resolution enough to sell the now redundant 12-24? Or would I be ok with the Bower 8mm Fisheye and keep the 12-24?

I want to do more portraiture as well, or at least try. So I was considering the Rokinon 85 f1.4. I know its not the FA 77, but I just dont know how often I would use it.

My kit lacks a great long Prime, but nature does not like me! But I would love a long prime to attempt more bird and animal stuff or whatever else you do with a long lens, maybe dump the 50-135 for a Sigma 70-200 f2.8?

I could also upgrade my body to a K5... ugh... I basically have an extra grand to play with thanks to some internet sales...

Thoughts or suggestions are welcome! I know that its all preferential to what you typically shoot. I have no intentions of weddings or ANYTHING like that in the future which is pretty much why I havent jumped to CaNikon... but IQ is important to me...

[RickyFromVegas]

with your set-up, I'd go for K-5

[mlatour]

Instead of another lense or body, what about a nice flash...

[The Kurly One]

Thats a decent idea, I have an older AF240Z and a couple Yungnuo 560's that I really like, they do a decent job even though they are completely manual, but they are very easy to setup with practise. I even considered a cheap little studio setup... but I really dont want the rpessures of portraits. I do this to relax...

[The Kurly One]

I also have a Tamron 18-250 I havent used in a year

[RioRico]

I can't comment on the UWA Sigmas except that users are happy with them, once they get a good copy. I really really like my Tamron 10-24. Fisheyes are a whole 'nother matter -- the DA10-17 is the lens that drove me to Pentax and there's nothing quite like it AFAIK. My Zenitar 16/2.8 doesn't get used enough now.

Other than UWA/FE, where you're weak is in fast glass. I really really like my 24/2, 28/2, and 85/2 MF lenses, as well as the FA50/1.4 and K50/1.2. You wanna do portraits? For head+shoulder portraiture I use a Fast Fifty; for ultra-thin-DOF headshots, it's either an 85/2 (Nikkor or Jupiter) or I strap a 1.5x front-TC onto a Fast Fifty. The 50/1.2 becomes 75/1.2; my 55/1.4 becomes 82/1.4; and the Sony VCL-1546A TC cost me all of US$4 shipped.

You're apparently not interested in long reach, so I won't suggest anything there. Good luck!

[Sol Invictus]

This is not really related to your needs but for me one of the biggest reasons for shooting Pentax is the lovely small primes and it looks like your kit could do with some. Why don't you get the DA 70mm? It's not too expensive and it's great for portraiture. How about the DA 40 (or XS 40 or whatever it's called) as a walk-around?

My only other suggestion is to upgrade to the K-5.

[The Kurly One]

I also have
A 28 f2.8
Sigma 24mm Super Wide

I havent progressed into street photography, but if I did I can see the appeal, but thought my 50 would be good enough as a non intimidating lens. The K-01 looks good but I would miss the bracketing....

[rbefly]

Hi Kurly,
Wow, you've already got a fine lens collection! Personally I wouldn't (given the lenses you already have) think an f/2.8 80-200mm is worth the $700-$900 more it will cost. You have the 50-135mm f/2.8 and a 200mm f/4.0. Nearly a grand to effectively gain one full stop between 135mm and 200mm isn't cost-effective. That's just one "click" of ISO for the 200mm.
Plus the M 200mm is very sharp and compact. The f/2.8 zoom is certainly going to be bigger and I doubt it will be much (if any) sharper at 200mm.
JMO.
For a street lens, the fifty is my second choice; The first is a 28mm or 35mm. You should be able to pick up an f/2.0 A or M for around $200-300, or the DA 35mm f/2.4 (new) for about $200. Perfect for walking around, doesn't scare anyone, light and compact.
For what I call "Candid Portraits" my favorite is an 85mm. I'm with Rico that an f/2.0 (or faster) is ideal. I love my M 85mm f/2.0, but the ones he mentioned (particularly if they're AF) are great choices, too.
Finally, to my way of thinking, you have enough good lenses, it's time to upgrade the body. A K-7 or K-5 would be the single biggest improvment you could make at this point.
Again, JMO, YMMV.
Good Luck, whatever you choose!
Ron

[The Kurly One]

Thank you all for your advise! I do appreciate and do look forward to more opinions and as always take everything with a grain of salt! Lol. have a good night and I look forward to reviewing this thread in the morning!

[The Kurly One]

Well I've spent the day thinking about my next purchase. I think I'm going to save my money. Literally, the plan now is to save this chunk of change until the next camera release. By then I should have a couple grand saved up. If its not a big improvement on the K5 hopefully its price will come down or I'll at least be able to afford a good kit of Limiteds or a nice fast long Prime... or a good studio setup... but I think I may still get that cheap 85mm LOL, just to appease my LBA

[lytrytyr]

I think I may still get that cheap 85mm LOL, just to appease my LBA

The Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/Whatever 85/1.4 might be an interesting option for you:

Rokinon / Samyang / Bower 85mm 1.4 Aspherical Lens Reviews - Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

[Frogfish]

Well I've spent the day thinking about my next purchase. I think I'm going to save my money. Literally, the plan now is to save this chunk of change until the next camera release. By then I should have a couple grand saved up. If its not a big improvement on the K5 hopefully its price will come down or I'll at least be able to afford a good kit of Limiteds or a nice fast long Prime... or a good studio setup... but I think I may still get that cheap 85mm LOL, just to appease my LBA

You've got most angles covered and for the type of photography you do I don't see a massive step up from the Kr to the K5 but I'd still say that the K5 is such a superb camera that you'd get the most satisfaction from selling off the Kx and buying a K5. At the new low prices (and with a few hundred $ from the Kx) you'd still have enough left over for possibly the only gap I see in your kit (unless you start to move over to primes from your quality zooms) .. a Sigma 30/1.4. An excellent low light, low DoF, super sharp monster and a great street lens (the 50/1.4 is too long to be good street lens IMHO) ! I have a Zeiss 28/2.8 to complement this and it is a different beast entirely (as your A 28 is) so there is no over-lap in practical use.

The only other option worth trying may be a very cheap (ca. US$100 used) Tamron 70-300 (which also does excellent 1:2 macro for flowers etc.) just to see if you like the 250-300mm range. It's a very decent lens for the money (though does have a fair amount of CA in high contrast shots).

[Pen-A]

I´d keep the k-x as a nice little backup and sell the k-r to fund a k-5 . You´re likely to get more money selling the k-r and it´s no better than k-x imo.

[Verglace]

Put the 1 grand you have right now in a savings account with a good interest rate. In the mean time save more money. When the k-5 replacement comes out you should have enough funds to be able to buy it new.